Am I the only one that thinks after Art&Science is played out and starts to look dated Cadillac should bring back these?

I wish we could make a car like that again. I know if tail fins come back it will be under much more stringent regulation & pedestian safety bull$h! but it would be so sweet to have a 2011 Cadillac with vertical tail fins and lower "Skegs".

Again, just thinking out loud.

Don't steal the glory of the 50s!

I personally like the modernized tail fins on the XLR and CTS.

BTW: I'm not talking necessarily about a retro trend that brings back tail fins in the exact shape and form of the 50s and 60s.

Even I can agree that the Challenger is too retro and lacks originality. (although I'd still buy it over a FWD Monte Carlo or a wallflower like the Accord Coupe or Solara)

Perhaps there is a way to make large sharp protrusions on the back of a car but make them safe for one in a million collisions and pedestrians.

Remember when Ralph Nader pointed out how fins were dangerous to pedestrians and other motorists and cited an example where a motorcylist was impaled on a set of DeSoto fins or something?

What a maroon.

Anyway, the DeVille never really lost its fins.

Remember when Ralph Nader pointed out how fins were dangerous to pedestrians and other motorists and cited an example where a motorcylist was impaled on a set of DeSoto fins or something?

What a maroon.

Anyway, the DeVille never really lost its fins.

OMG! That really happened?! I was going to crack a really bad joke about that!!

It was actually something that wasn't rare. Think: those things were high on a car and protruded beyond the bumper. Recipe for disaster.

Maybe people should stop tailgating and watch out for vehicular traffic. That'll prevent more injuries and fatalities than a car made of nerf.

OK first of all

make them safe for one in a million collisions and pedestrians

if someone runs into the back of a regular car they may be disabled for life, this costs money. If they run into the back of a 61 Caddy and become "impaled"......one less mouth to feed. Personally Id prefer to get them with the front of a 66 Toronado, they could then be put in a smaller box, thereby saving virgin forests.

Seriously, for above stated reasons we know it will never happen, it would never be allowed. Arent they about to destroy auto design again by applying some form of crumple area so that idiots that dont look both ways before stepping off the curb are put in wheel chairs rather than taking their rightful place, elsewhere ?

The only reason I talk like this is because of how foolish these regulations are getting. Insurance companys are ruleing the world.

I think there is a lot stylisticly that could be done by the use of more creases and flods in the metal but I dont think we will see that either. These manufacturers are not going to put that kind of work into the sheet metal.

Actually the pedestrian measures are more for drivers making right hand turns and not watching for pedestrians.

Actually the pedestrian measures are more for drivers making right hand turns and not watching for pedestrians.

So, the answer should be in the form of better traffic rule enforcement and driver instruction, not redesigning cars in a futile attempt to make them uninjurious to people.

I hope it'll return and looking like this

just like in the 1959 Cadillac's

I see no problem in making cars safer up front so fewer people die. I think a combination of the two would be best.

Really, I don't think that cars are getting any uglier due to the new design measures. Many European cars already were quite hideous to begin with...

Anyway, the DeVille never really lost its fins.

Yeah, but the DTS finally did so I took the liberty of quickly, and poorly, chopping them back in. Here is a before and after.

I think a modern interpretation of fins would be very possible....it would be refreshing in a sea of banal.

I would do cartwheels if Cadillac and others would even do a subtle fin like this again:

Edited December 11, 200519 yr by HarleyEarl

I think a modern interpretation of fins would be very possible....it would be refreshing in a sea of banal.

I would do cartwheels if Cadillac and others would even do a subtle fin like this again:

They already did:

Very subtle, but they are there. You have to see it in person though to really see it.

You folks are a hellva lot more liberal in your definition of fins than I am, and I love & live them.

You should be able to put at least a finger (and I much prefer a fist!) within the plane of the edge of the fender and the deck or rear fascia.

This would mean the '71 Harley posted would technically be a fin (tho I would never call it that- see below) but the CTS isn't even hinting. Yes, I've seen them up close.

I go further: I want a backcut somewhere, a projection outward from the body. To me (and the historian at large), the Cadillac fin years are without question: 1948-1964 inclusive. Nothing after '64 had either a backcut or a projection away from the body (the '71 quarter's trailing edges are inline with the body envelope). Again- this last paragraph is my definition (and most of the rest of the car hobbyist's).

1964: a 'backcut' and therefore a "fin":

1966: no 'backcut', no "fin":

See, I've seen far too many Caddies with the fins just crushed or mangled (even the fins you don't consider as fins) as the result of an accident, and they never look as good as they did pre-crash no matter how much effort is put into them. Face it, things that stick out tend to get clipped, whether they are sidemirrors, antennae or fins. Just imagine a finned Cadillac parked in typical strip mall row parking, and that minivan is backing out of a spot and instead of tapping the bumper lightly, it crushes a fin. They just aresn't worth it. Subtle nods to the past are classy and attractive ways of paying homage to the great designers of yesteryear. Honestly, it's kind of like fashion...whenever we say "The 80s are back!" (like they are now) it really isn't 1985 all over again. If that were the case it would look ridiculous. No, it is a few things from the 80s worn in tandem with more current lines, like aviators worn with modern casual clothing like Abercrombie & Fitch or Pac Sun: a subtle nod to the past without reliving it and being stuck in a time warp.

So, the answer should be in the form of better traffic rule enforcement and driver instruction, not redesigning cars in a futile attempt to make them uninjurious to people.

THANK YOU!!!

Also...

Razor:

Agreed 100%. A guy on a motorcycle rear ending is a recipie for disaster.... the fin is just the cherry on top of the cake.

Balthazar:

I agree 100% wiht everything in your post. That being said I'll tkae a funky CTS rear tail light treatment over no effort at all. It does kind of hint at something sharp and has a certain appeal to it. Better than taht pale-imitation of a 3-series Bimmer Lincoln LS wiht Mitsubishi tail lights.

Funkypunk:

Effort: A+ Execution: Late 1950s Desoto

Comments:

Yes Balthy, but you are so .....so.........just........so ..........you know......

Not all sharks have the same fin.

Love that 70? Mr Earl ! The late B Regencys still had some fin action going on with the tall thin taillamps too. Now thats something Caddy could go along way with the tall thin cats eye tailight, we must have them back !

No, the CTS STS does not have subtle fins, its simply got an edge with a small amount of character, more of a kick back to the 67 Eldorado in my opinion. A&S taillamps need help !

yessir I shure LUV dem wings ! yummy !

Id luv to crawl under there on my back and check out the undercarraige

Edited December 11, 200519 yr by razoredge

Now, you all know Im big on conspiracies

I trully believe this was the sole inspiration for the movie Jaws

scroll untill only the tail fin is visible of the picture....then.....

.....just....breath....very.....slowly....and.....stare....into.....its.....mout

h....you .....will.....see....it....becomes.....a......Jaw......leaping....from.....the..

..water

Cool....ey ?

Edited December 11, 200519 yr by razoredge

They already did:

Very subtle, but they are there.  You have to see it in person though to really see it.

Yep. I'm with ya on that one.

Razor:

Yes, very ture.... it does have a sinister and very diabolical attitude to it. Very Spooky. Those lower fins (Skegs) just make it so over-the-top and zany that my heart skips beats when I see this car.

I mean damnit... Chryslers's fins got wacky and huge in 57-60 so Cadillac was like "We can't win on size alone people let's hear some ideas on how we can bitchslap the competition, any suggestions for crazy fins?"

--some guy in the back of the room--

"Uh, yeah... instead of two fins we need FOUR and have the lower two mounted in the rear quarter panel like somekind of switchblade knife. That will show those Pansy-Assed boys at Chrysler."

--evil laughter fills the room--

I'm right on that edgyness, "you know what I"m talkin bout"

In 60 through early/mid 70's, in the village we had a old couple that were slightly better off. They were still driving one of these winged warriors and I so wish I could see it in my head to identify what year it was. Id say 62/3/4 maybe. I was intimidated by it, black and all huge. I actually did not like it. Had a funeral feel to it.

Ex did a great job at DeSoto and Chrysler

I have this sick and twisted fantasy of having a beater 1961 Cadillac and driving it around on Halloween night, but here's where it gets interesting:

Oaky bear with me here... I'd spear a Jack-o-Lantern onto each rear fin and let the tail light act as the candle. How nucking futs would THAT be?!?!

Edited December 12, 200519 yr by Sixty8panther

Honestly some fins almost get me hard...is that wierd?....That '71 Coupe DeVille just has the most incredible rear, profile and well it's perfect. Razor you are so right, please Cadillac bring back these iconic elements...do the slim vertical tailights in a subtle fin....I will be forever greatful.

I find those fins to be grotesque and offensive add-ons to otherwise slinky shapes, especially for nowdays.

Edited December 19, 200519 yr by S.Myers

Add ons... How can it be an add-on if it starts at the A-pillar and goes on past the rear bumper?

There were a few "tacky" fins done by a couple Independants in the 50s but 70% of them are gorgeous. Wiht the exception of a 59 Turnpike Cruiser and a few Fords.

the XTS and SRX have vestigial ones.

the XTS and SRX have vestigial ones.

I agree with you Drew that they do have that and I am fine with it. Over all, I like the old cars with Fins, but do not need them on modern auto's.

Course if they can put them on the front so we can pick off the stupid Cyclist on city streets that love to cut off auto's and yell that we are in the wrong. I am all for it.

the XTS and SRX have vestigial ones.

Yep. Unfortunately and judging from Jalopnik's pic of the 2014 CTS rear-end, GM missed out on the opportunity to do the same with the NG CTS...

Cadillac's Arts and Science is moving and evolving. While may get hints of a fin the 50's and 60's are well in our past.

I like the extended edges that Cadillac has done in varying degrees since the '70s- nice hallmark. But nothing since '64 has been a true fin.

Yeah, I am very concerned about the rear end on the new CTS after seeing it. It loses the cool fins of the SRX and XTS, it's even less finny than the current car. Bland from the rear, but wicked from the front.

Edited February 9, 201312 yr by ocnblu

I'm not buying the rear shot as production-ready, esp considering the front.

I was behind some fins the other day in a parking lot...guy was driving a primer gray '60 Caddy 2dr ht, black steel wheels and whitewalls... pretty cool to see a 50+ yr old car out and about....one of my favorite Caddy fin designs is probably the '61--sharp pointy fins + skegs FTW.

The wierdest fins also were in '61 IMO---Dodge's reverse ones, specifically the Dart,,

I don't know if fins could make a come back, but I'd love to see longer decklids again...it's just so striking how long the decklids on the typical full size (or even '60s midsize cars) were in the '50s-60s...I wonder if the currently ubiquitous stubby tall tail look will ever go away...

Edited February 9, 201312 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

^ I don't see the stubby deck EVER going away. Back when design was about aesthetics, sure, but now design is completely driven by CAFE.

^ I don't see the stubby deck EVER going away. Back when design was about aesthetics, sure, but now design is completely driven by CAFE.

You are probably right...aerodynamics....wedge shapes...

I'll take the teardrop over the wedge anyday.

Large fins will never come back as few cars are large enought to pull it off anymore.

Lets face it the 59 fins were nearly as large a the Spark is today. LOL!

The main issue is much of the styling back then just does not translate to the smaller cars of today and you need a lot of sheel metal to pull it off to where it looks right and has the flow it needs to complete the design.

Besides the goverment and the insurance companies would declare them unsafe because people on cell phones could back into blind people in parking lots or some other crazy thing.

Let me get this straight... ARE YOU SUGGESTING that one tailfin from a 1959 Chevrolet Impala Sport Sedan has enough metal to build one entire 2013 Chevrolet Spark???

One thing that is sad today is that while cars continue to devolve into smaller and smaller forms, trucks are still as huge and obese as ever. Not fair for car enthusiasts.

...hence the dire, burning need for a truly compact, authentic pickup truck

Nooooo.... hence the need for truly full-sized, authentic cars.

Nooooo.... hence the need for truly full-sized, authentic cars.

That was the point I was making.. I have no interest in tiny, fwd 4cyl cars... I'd like to see more large V8 RWD cars...not enough of them anymore...like a modern day GM B-body or Ford Panther...with the latest cabin tech and interiors and the latest V8s and transmissions, and at least 4000lbs. The problem w/ the later Panthers is they didn't evolve and were stuck in the early '90s. The Taurus is a decent rental car, but I wouldn't want one--4cyl and FWD and too tall and narrow looking.

I do like the 300C and Charger quite a bit, though...

Edited February 9, 201312 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

300 stands alone proudly. Great car.

I like the 1961 Chrysler 300.                           

Tail Fins seem to have come back in the way Cadillac has fashioned their rear lights.

Identifying, with objective certainty, which vintage cars 'have fins' and which don't can get sticky in some instances, but generally speaking; sheet metal must project either upward, outward or rearward from the surrounding metal. Sheet metal must in some way create a projecting edge. A taillight cannot be a fin by itself.

In the below pic of 2 Hudsons, the coral & white '55 has fins, the blue '54 does not. Anywy, that's my decades-long analysis of the issue.

 

How does the blue car not project rearward from the sheet metal? I can clearly see it projecting when looking at the inside side of the tail light?

Anyway.... I think modern interpretations of the fin using plastic or even light piping are at least doable.